J.C.S. Rawat, J. - (1.) THIS Writ Petition has been preferred by the Petitioner for seeking Mandamus to consider his case for promotion to the higher post of the Assistant Engineer from the post of Junior Engineer with effect from the date his juniors viz Uttam Kujur and Imil Kandulna had been promoted.
(2.) IN nut -shell, the Petitioner's case is that he was joined as Junior Engineer in the year 1987 in the Road Construction Department of the State of Bihar and he was posted as Junior Engineer in the said Department. Since then, he had been working under the State of Bihar. The combined seniority list was prepared in the State of Bihar and it was published in which the Petitioner's name figures at serial No. 1651 whereas aforesaid two persons namely Uttam Kujur and Imil Kandulna figures at serial No. 1815 and 1816 respectively. It is admitted that in the seniority list, above named two persons were junior to the Petitioner. It is alleged that the case of the above named two persons was considered by the Respondents in the year 2005 and they were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer but the case of the Petitioner was not considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee and his juniors were promoted to the said post. When the Petitioner's case was not considered, he preferred this writ petition. The Respondents contested the petition and it is not denied in the counter affidavit that the Petitioner's seniority as indicated in the writ petition is not correct, so it is admitted fact that the Petitioner is definitely senior and the other two persons whose names have been given above are junior to him. It is not also stated that the case of the Petitioner was considered and he was not found fit. The counsel for the Respondents could not demonstrate from the counter affidavit that the case of the Petitioner was considered by the D.P.C. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that now the allocation of cadre of Junior Engineer has been finalized under the provision of Bihar Re -organization Act and the Petitioner has been finally allocated to the State of Jharkhand and now the State of Jharkhand is competent to grant the promotion. They are preparing the gradation list and thereafter the promotion would be accorded to the Petitioner in accordance with law. This counter affidavit was filed on 5th September, 2006 and now we are running in 2011. The Respondents, at the last, prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Petitioner was senior and his name figures at serial No. 1651 whereas the names of the two other persons Uttam Kujur and Imil Kandulna figures at serial No. 1815 and 1816 in the gradation list (Annexure -3 to the writ petition). He further contended that when the junior persons as indicated above were promoted, the case of the Petitioner was not considered though he was senior to him.;